In Re Derek N. T. Moore v. the State of Texas

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that an Ordinance that generated substantial costs would “materially inhibit” the provision of services and thus constituted effective prohibition under Section 253(a)
• concluding that costs imposed by a local ordinance, which “would nearly quadruple [the telecommunications provider’s] cost of doing business,” were “sufficient to show that the [ordinance’s] rental provisions are prohibitive because they create a massive increase in cost”
• concluding the legislative history of § 253 is devoid of congressional intent supporting a private right of action
• highlighting the congressional intent to allow “local communities to deal with their rights of way ... and meet any challenge on home ground in their local district courts.”
• assuming, without deciding, that a test was correct when the parties agreed on it
• stating a private right of action “is not required where a party seeks to enjoin the enforcement of a regulation on the ground that the local ordinance is preempted by federal law”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).